I have been working at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory full-time (More than 10 years)

Doesn't Recommend

Neutral Outlook

No opinion of CEO

Doesn't Recommend

Neutral Outlook

No opinion of CEO

Pros

I've worked here for more than 20 years. The pay is just ok. I could get more on the outside. Benefits are ok but I actually have my benefits through my spouse now with an outside business because they are better. The main reason I stay is I'm close to my small children and I do have the flexibility to do things with them. I really like the people I work with but find management doesn't have a clue what they are doing and they treat employee's poor. You might be a great scientist but stink as a manager. The Matrix system is really nice and I've been given the opportunity to work all over the lab on different projects. If funding goes away you can usually find something within a month instead of being laid off.

Cons

During the UC days it was great. We knew pay was better on the outside but we had a company mentality and wanted to retire here. Now new people come in and then head off to Google or Yahoo for lots more money. Scientists don't make good mangers. In all my years I can think of only 2 or 3 people I felt were great managers and one got pushed out of management for not drinking the management Kool Aid.

I have been working at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory full-time (More than 5 years)

Recommends

Neutral Outlook

No opinion of CEO

Recommends

Neutral Outlook

No opinion of CEO

Pros

Full of challenges, management gives you a wide latitude to research and deliver solutions. You are treated like a highly trained individual, not a 'cog in the machine'. Good work/like balance for people with families. Working in Livermore means you can find a lot of affordable housing (example: Tracy, $300k houses, 20 miles east of lab).

Cons

Salaries are not very competitive once an employee grows their skills and responsibilities into a senior software engineer/architecture role. Your salary will typically rise to the average salary level, then plateau. This is good for people that want a stable, 40 hour job, and are more focused on their family, but frustrating for someone that is ambitious.

Advice to Management

The salary ranking system for computer scientists constrains the size of raises that new, ambitious, hard working employees can get. I've seen this result in newer computer science employees learning a tremendous amount at the lab in their first few years, then getting disillusioned at the 3-5% raises they get. Facebook or Google is usually thrilled to offer them a 30% higher salary and grab them after we've done such a great job turning them into a highly skilled HPC software engineer. I think these issues are common across the DOE and other government labs. It's just exasperated because we're located net to Silicon Valley, a highly competitive area.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Response

Aug 28, 2014

Thank you for taking the time to share this. We view compensation as a critical issue and will make a point of sharing your input with senior management.

I have been working at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory full-time (More than 10 years)

Recommends

Neutral Outlook

No opinion of CEO

Recommends

Neutral Outlook

No opinion of CEO

Pros

Absolutely wonderful location in the San Francisco bay area, RELATIVELY affordable to live near by (in Livermore), and lots of opportunities to work on really unique and interesting projects. The people you meet there are absolutely the best part about working at a DOE national lab. Lots of employee activities through the abundant networking groups.

Cons

Lots of regulations and rules to follow. Compensation is very slow to respond to added responsibility. And if you have to deal with Washington DC, the politics might be more than some people can handle.

Advice to Management

Try to find what people are good at and focus them on that. Too many good scientists are bad managers. Promotion to management should be because of management aptitude, not because of technical achievement.

I have been working at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory full-time (More than 10 years)

Doesn't Recommend

Negative Outlook

Disapproves of CEO

Doesn't Recommend

Negative Outlook

Disapproves of CEO

Pros

Lots of unique computer resources available. Livermore and the surrounding area is a nice place to live meaning minimal or no commute. The work here covers a wide range of topics so it is relatively easy to move between projects.

Cons

The working conditions are horrific. Buildings and offices are unmaintained and uninhabitable. If you are a software developer you will spend all of your time cleaning up ill conceived code written by PhD Physicists. Software professionals are not given control of the development of major codes. Hence, the opportunities for advancement or even for visibility of a computer software developer are extremely limited. For the past 5-10 years the Lab has been rudderless. There is no clearly articulated vision or direction. As a result the Lab has been on an accelerating downward trajectory. The layers of management and stifling bureaucracy make getting even the most mundane things done a major effort. I have personally needed to walk 1/2 mile to find a functioning color printer. The performance review process is more or a beauty pagent than a real performance review. There is little connection between one's ranking and ones productivity.

Advice to Management

Value the people who are doing the real work here. It's high time that software and the professionals who develop it are valued, recognized, and given control of software development. The Lab's posters tout that the Lab promises "a first class work environment to our employees". In fact the work environment here is third world. The office conditions are shameful. How do you expect to attract or even keep talent when your employees are forced to work in buildings with completely non-functional facilities? The Lab desperately needs a vision and direction. I'm not talking about a cute slogan but a real vision for growth and how to achieve that growth. In particular how does the Lab become competitive in the real world. Our cost structure is so out of line with the real world that we can not compete. This fact has been recognized for some time but nothing is ever done to address it. Finally, the Lab is fundamentally broken. Lots of fundamentally broken organizations have turned themselves around but that requires recognition that things are broken and a will to fix it. Currently the Lab has neither. In fact the opaque, multi-layered management structure here has institutionalized everything that is broken.

“Modernizing the Lab’s computing infrastructure will enable us to better exploit next-generation supercomputers for NNSA by tapping the talents of top academic and private sector partners.” -- Laboratory Director Bill Goldstein

Glassdoor has 180 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory reviews submitted anonymously by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is right for you.